temple insights - brigham young university–idahoemp.byui.edu/satterfieldb/rel390r/fur further...

~ !')::14, , ,~

, ~ ~ ••~.:; ~ 'J~~~'. 'I,.,~ ,,\ ,

V. ·'~"~~~~~"'Iif'~'Ji. ••

'- ~ ••.•_ ~ ,,=- •.••••..• _ ~.;a<f'_"-~~_ ••••.•....,. • J, ,~. ~ _

TEMPLE INSIGHTS---t.O'l---

PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERPRETERMATTHEW B. BROWN MEMORIAL CONFERENCE

THE TEMPLE ON MOUNT ZION

22 SEPTEMBER 2012

TEMPLE ON MOUNT ZION SERIES 2

EDITORSWILLIAM]. HAMBLINDAVID ROLPH SEELY

MORMONINTERPRETER.COM

THE INTERPRETER FOUNDATIONEBORN BOOKS

2014

© 2014 The Interpreter Foundation. A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

The goal of The Interpreter Foundation is to increase understanding of scripturethrough careful scholarly investigation and analysis of the insights provided by awide range of ancillary disciplines. We hope to illuminate, by study and faith, theeternal spiritual message of the scriptures - that Jesus is the Christ.

Although the Board fully supports the goals and teachings of the Church,the Interpreter Foundation is an independent entity and is neither owned,controlled by, nor affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintsor with Brigham Young University. All research and opinions provided are thesole responsibility of their respective authors, and should not be interpreted asthe opinions of the Board, nor as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief, or

practice.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any format orin any medium without written permission from The Interpreter Foundation.Unauthorized public performance, broadcasting, transmission, copying,mechanical or electronic, is a violation of applicable laws. This product and theindividual images contained within are protected under the laws of the UnitedStates and other countries. Unauthorized duplication, distribution, transmission,or exhibition of the whole or of any part therein may result in civil liability andcriminal prosecution. The downloading of images is not permitted.

201817161514 5 4 3 2

Published by:The Interpreter FoundationOrern, UTMormonInterpreter.com

and

Eborn Books254 S. Main StreetSalt Lake City, UT 84101EbornBooks.com

Cover artwork by Bryce Haymond. The photo of Matthew B. Brown by JamesRoh on the front cover is copyright 2009 by the Daily Herald, with thanks to

Spenser Heaps.

Temple Insights / Willam J. Hamblin and David Rolph Seely - 1st edition

Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN-13: 978-1-890-71850-3 (Hardbound), 978-1-890-71851-0 (Softbound)

TAl

In Memoriam of Matthew.Matthew Roper

The Handclasp, the TempleMatthew B. Brown

The Crown of Creation .David Rolph and Io Ann I

The Ark and the Tent: Temp,Jeffrey M. Bradshaw

Edfu and Exodus .John Gee

The Divine Handclasp in thDavid Calabro

Job: An LDS Reading .Mack C. Stirling

From Dust to Exalted Cro11-David J. Larsen

Psalm 105: Chiasmus, Cre~Stephen D. Ricks

Ancient Temple Imagery inDavid E. Bokovoy

Axes Mundi: A ComparatiMark Alan Wright

AXES MUNDI:RITUAL COMPLEXES IN MESOAMERICA

AND THE BOOK OF MORMON

Mark Alan Wright

An axis mundi is a sacred place that connects heaven and earthand is believed to be the center of the world, even the cosmos.

Mircea Eliade notes that such places are made sacred either throughritual consecration or through a manifestation of the divine known ashierophany, which "results in detaching a territory from the surroundingcosmic milieu and making it qualitatively different." Countless cultures,ancient and modern, use axes mundi as ideological and ritual foci. Eliadeexplains:

Where the break-through from plane to plane has been modifiedby a hierophany, there too an opening has been made, eitherupward (the divine world) or downward (the underworld, theworld of the dead). The three cosmic levels -' earth, heaven,underworld - have been put in communication ... thiscommunication is sometimes expressed through the imageof a universal pillar, axis mundi, which at once connects andsupports heaven and earth.'

The sacred architecture of Mesoamerica was designed accordingto cosmological principles, establishing specific locations within theirpolities as an axis mundi. Their pyramids, topped by temples, were man-made sacred mountains, representing the first mountain that rose fromthe primordial waters of creation. Mesoamerican scholar Julia Guernesynoted that even comparatively early Mesoamerican cities, such asIzapa, "created a dynamic environment in which primordial time andthe present were seamlessly woven together, creating a veritable webof politics and cosmogenesis."3 Concerning specific ritual loci [sacredplaces) established by such communities, Pamela L. Geller notes,"Fraught with liminal connotations, axes mundi mediate between pastand present, natural and supernatural arenas." The rulers and ritual

B8 • TEMPLE INSIGHTS

iecialists used a variety of complex rituals in an effort to bring the pastito the present.

A modern analogy might be drawn with Latter-day Saint temples.rior to their dedication, they are merely beautiful buildings that can! entered by anyone during the "open house" period. Once they are.dicated through ritual action, however, they become an axis mundi.ncient Maya temples similarly had dedicatory rituals for their temples.ie most common was the "fire-entering" ritual, wherein incense wasirned inside of a sacred building to dedicate (or rededicate) it. Such:uals are recorded in the hieroglyphic texts as och k'ak' ta-y-otot, "the'e enters into his house."

Many types of axes mundi existed in ancient Mesoamerica, bothtural and man-made. The structural form of these supernaturally-arged locations was virtually irrelevant; what mattered was thembolic function. Mountains; caves, temples, altars, performanceitforms, the central hearth of a home, portable objects such as censers. burning incense, and even the human body (when adorned with:red regalia) could all function as portals of communication between~human and divine realms. Likewise, in the Book of Mormon there!countless places where ritual activity was performed that opened thertal between earth and heaven. Some of these are obvious, such asnples, synagogues, and sanctuaries, but we also read of ritual activityroyal palaces, in mountains, the wilderness, fields, and even homes.:h ritual complexes are not limited to faithful Nephites; the BookMormon explicitly mentions them among other groups such as thenanites, Nehorites, Amalekites, and Zoramites (Alma 23:2; 26:29).6The most conspicuous type of axis mundi in the Book of Mormoni ancient Mesoamerica is the temple. Nephi tells us that he built aiple "after the manner of the temple of Solomon," but is quick toilify that statement by noting that "it could not be built like untoomen's temple" because they lacked "precious things" (2 Nephi 5:16).7rat is the difference between "after the manner of" and "not ... likeo"? In essence, it differed from Solomon's temple cosmetically but notmologically. We might draw an analogy between the temples in Sango, California, and Provo, Utah. Stylistically, the two buildings arete distinct, but functionally they are identical. The same might be saidcomparing the temples described in the Book of Mormon with what

WRIGHT, AXES MUNDI: RITUAL COMPLEXES. 189

is known of those found in ancient Mesoamerica. Although they weresuperficially different, they may have had similar functions. This studywill explore the functions of temples and other ritual locations in boththe Book of Mormon and Mesoamerica and draw comparisons betweenthe ways these axes mundi were used. Methodologically, I will rely onepigraphic, iconographic, ethnographic, ethnohistoric, linguistic, andarchaeological sources of data from Mesoamerica and compare them torelevant passages from the Book of Mormon.

John Welch's careful analysis ofNephite temple worship highlighteda number of functions that Nephite temples served." In them, kingswere crowned, religious teachings were dispensed, the plan of salvationwas taught, the people were exhorted to proper behavior, sacrificessymbolizing the atonement of Christ were performed, religious and legalcovenants were made and renewed, and the resurrected Jesus appearedto His faithful people as their God. Though clearly not identical, I arguethat Mesoamerican ritual loci - axes mundi - served functionally andideologically similar purposes.

The Temple as a Place of Ritual

Temples were typically the most prominent and grandiose structuresin Mesoamerican cities. Although the ancient term for them has thusfar resisted translation, among modern Maya speakers they are referredto as k'uh na, or "god house,"? At any given Maya city, temples androyal palaces anchor the site core. Maya scholars use the term templein reference to buildings whose primary function is assumed to bereligious, whereas palaces are structures that appear to have been lociof political activity. However, the religious and political realms are notnecessarily distinguishable among the Classic period Maya ruins, so astrict delineation between them is an imposition of our own modernperspective. Admittedly, the precise function of these structures is notclearly understood; the epigraphic and iconographic records containprecious few clues as to their use. It is common for large sites to havemultiple temples, even within a single site core, each of which may haveserved different religious or political purposes."

There was a shift in the manner of temple construction from thePreclassic to the Classic periods in the Maya lowlands." Preclassictemples typically were not intended to aggrandize individual rulers;

190 • TEMPLE iNSIGHTS

rather, their architecture and iconography tended to highlight specificdeities and reflect grand cosmologies.'> Since the focus of Preclassicperiod temples was typically not on specific rulers, it is unsurprising thatfew of them have been shown to contain royal tombs." Likewise, in theBook of Mormon the focus of temple rituals was on their deity ratherthan their rulers. King Benjamin seemed concerned that because of hisexalted office his people might believe him to be more than a mortalman, perhaps even a divine king. Ironically, by informing his peoplethat the words he was delivering to them were given to him by an angelwho literally "stood before" him (Mosiah 3:2), he confirmed that he wasin fact an intermediary between the human and supernatural realms, adefining characteristic of divine kings in the ancient world.

The Temple as a Place for Coronation

The most well-documented coronation in the Book of Mormon takesolace at the temple in Zarahemla, when King Benjamin gathers hisJeople together to declare that his son Mosiah was to be "a king andl ruler over" them (Mosiah 2:30). Benjamin ritually presents Mosiah"lith the royal paraphernalia: the plates of brass, the plates of Nephi,he sword of Laban, and the Liahona (Mosiah 1:16). The presentation of'oyal regalia was likewise an important aspect of accession among thevlaya. On the murals of San Bartolo, Guatemala (ca. 100 Bc)14 we see.n enthronement ceremony wherein the ruler sits upon a wooden towerIr scaffold to receive the emblems of rulership." The coronation and'resentation of a new king to his subjects would have been an occasion ofnuch pomp and circumstance. Maya temples form part of the site core,nd were designed with public spectacle in mind." They were typicallyhe tallest building in the central precinct and always faced a large plazaaat would accommodate thousands of people. The architectural layoutf temple complexes effectively maximized acoustics, enabling speakerstop a temple to be seen and heard clearly throughout the plaza." Nephitennples may have had similar acoustic properties (cf. Mosiah 1:18; 2:1,-6; 7:17).

The Temple as a Place for Religious Instruction

1roughout the Book of Mormon we read of religious instruction beingven at the temple: by Jacob, Benjamin, and even the Savior. Among


Figure 1:Flower Mountain, the paradise of creation, from the murals of San Bartolo,Guatemala (ca. 100 BC). (Drawing by Traci Wright after Heather Hurst from The

Murals of San Bartolo, El Peten, Guatemala Part 1: The North Wall, 2005:8)

the Maya, we turn again to the murals of San Bartolo for a comparison.The murals were likely didactic, meaning they were used for religiousinstruction. Elaborate imagery was used in lieu of writing to teach thosewho may have been illiterate, similar to the art that adorned Medievalchurches." The San Bartolo murals were found in a comparatively smallroom that juts out from the base of a much larger temple structure. Thetwo entry doors are low - about four feet high - which would requirethose who enter to lower their heads and bow deeply in order to gainaccess. Once inside, the initiates would stand upright and find themselvessurrounded by beautiful murals running along the upper portion ofeach of the walls, composed of elaborately painted mythological scenes.Questions remain as to where the visual narrative begins and ends, andsome of the iconography remains difficult to interpret. Stephen Houstondescribes it as "a room of 'mysteries' for initiates, sequestered in anunusual location at the back of a temple.?"

In the most general of terms, the murals of San Bartolo depict themoment of creation - the ordering of the cosmos, the establishment of

192 • TEMPLE INSIGHTS

Figure 2: Early Classic Maya ruler being enthroned in emulation of the accessionof the Maize God, from the murals of San Bartolo, Guatemala (ca. 100 BC)

(Drawing by Traci Wright after Heather Hurst from The Murals of San Bartolo, EIIf Peten, Guatemala Part 2: The West Wall, 2010:59)

the primordial axis mundi. It is followed by a paradisiacal scene, FlowerMountain, and the ensuing emergence of the first humans. Next arescenes of sacrifice, leading up to a scene of resurrection of the MaizeGod and his subsequent enthronement. The murals culminate with ahuman ruler being enthroned in the exact same manner as the MaizeGod - his accession to an earthly throne mimicking that of the MaizeGod's ascension to a heavenly throne.

In sum, the murals may depict a premortal existence; the orderingof the cosmos; a paradise of creation and the emergence of mankind;instruction on proper sacrifice; and the heavenly enthronement of thegod of resurrection, culminating in a scene where a human accedes toa throne identical to the one used by the god of resurrection. It explainswhere humans came from (Flower Mountain); why they are here (toworship the gods), and where they are going (to the solar paradise of thesun where they will ultimately sit upon a celestial throne).

When we refer to the "plan of salvation," we are essentially referringto the underlying mythology that answers our favorite questions as


members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: Wheredid I come from? Why am I here? Where am I going? These answersare provided in the Book of Mormon and clearly center on Christ; thatHe was born, was crucified, and rose on the third day, enabling us toresurrect and return home to God the Father. How can we relate this toMesoamerica? Here I wade into some extremely speculative waters. To beclear, I am not postulating that the Pre classic Maya of San Bartolo wereNephites or that they maintained a belief in the plan of salvation," but Iam suggesting that some of the underlying themes on the murals of SanBartolo may be an indication as to how the Preclassic Maya attempted toanswer those same questions.

Temple as a Place of Sacrifice

Ancient Mesoamerican temples were the epicenter of royal sacrifice.Blood was the most sacred of substances, and Mesoamerican culturesengaged in both human and animal sacrifice. The typical method ofhuman sacrifice was to stretch the victim across a stone altar and have hishands and feet held down by four men. A priest would then make a largeincision directly below the ribcage using a knife made out of razor-sharpflint or obsidian, and while the victim was yet alive the priest wouldthrust his hand into the cut and reach up under the ribcage and intothe chest and rip out the victim's still-beating heart. Among the Aztec,the body of the victim would then be rolled down the precipitous frontstairway of the temple. Accounts by the early Spanish conquerors whowitnessed such events claimed that the Aztecs would do such sacrificesby the thousands and the bodies would literally pile up at the base of thetemple. The numbers are likely exaggerated, and little evidence from theearlier Maya periods suggests that human sacrifice was performed on agrand scale, but the evidence is clear that it was in fact performed."

The peoples of the Book of Mormon would have been familiar withthe types of sacrifices being offered by their surrounding Mesoamericanneighbors, which often comprised burnt offerings of animals, suchas deer or birds. The righteous would have interpreted such sacrificesas a means to point their souls to Christ (Jacob 4:5; Alma 34:14). YetAmulek prophesied that "it is expedient that there should be a greatand last sacrifice; yea, not a sacrifice of man, neither of beast, neither


Figure 3: Classic Maya scene of sacrifice involving human, beast, and fowl.(Drawing by Traci Wright after Alexandre Tokovinine from Reading Maya Art: A

Hieroglyphic Guide to Ancient Maya Painting and Sculpture, 2011:92)

of any manner of fowl; for it shall not be a human sacrifice; but it mustbe an infinite and eternal sacrifice" (Alma 34:10). It is significant thatthe three things that Amulek is expressly telling the apostate Zoramitesnot to sacrifice are the three most common things that were offered byMesoamerican worshipers: human, beast, and fowl. It stands to reasonthat the Zoramites, in rejecting Nephite religion, would embrace thecultural practices of the more dominant culture, as would be expectedof an apostate group."

The faithful in the Book of Mormon looked forward to the day whenChrist would offer himself as sacrifice in their behalf. However, havingno point of reference with regard to crucifixion in their own history, theymay not have had a clear understanding of what such a death entailed.Nephi explained that the Lord speaks to us "according to our language,unto our understanding" (2 Nephi 31:3). Correspondingly, culturalcontext directly impacts the way people interpret manifestations of thedivine." Thus. when Christ anneared t() thp Npnhitp< j.,p ""m 1,.,,,,,, 1,00 •.•


communicating with them according to their cultural language whenhe invited them to come and feel for themselves the wounds in his flesh.He bade them first to thrust their hands into his side, and secondarilyto feel the prints in his hands and feet (3 Nephi 11:14). This contrastswith his appearance to his apostles in Jerusalem after his resurrection.Among them, he invited them to touch solely his hands and feet (Luke24:39-40).24 Why the difference? To a people steeped in Mesoamericanculture, the sign that a person had been ritually sacrificed would havebeen an incision on their side - suggesting they had had their heartsremoved" - whereas for the people ofJerusalem in the first century, thewounds that would indicate someone had been sacrificed would havebeen in the hands and the feet - the marks of crucifixion.

Temple as a Place to Enter Divine Presence

In both Mesoamerica and the Book of Mormon, the temple is a placewhere worshipers go to enter into the presence of the divine. It was atthe temple in Bountiful where Christ appeared in a grand theophanyto the gathered Nephite survivors. The Maya believed they could evincethe presence of gods and other supernatural beings within their sacredspaces through ritual activity. This was oftentimes done throughincense or burnt offerings, wherein it was believed the billowing smokeeffectually created a screen or portal through which supernatural beingscould manifest themselves. On Lintel 25 from Yaxchilan, for example, anoblewoman named Ix K'abal Xook burns strips of paper that are soakedwith her own blood." From the smoke of the sacrificial bowl issues fortha vision serpent, out of whose jaws emerges a patron deity of her city.

Within their temples, the Maya placed effigies that they believedwere physical manifestations of their gods. Iconographically, thereare only a handful of depictions of such deity effigies - idols, as theauthors of scripture would call them - that are housed within temples.Although no direct evidence survives from the Preclassic or even theClassic periods, in the Postclassic these effigies were carved by priests outof cedar, called k'u che, which literally means "god tree" or "holy tree."?"The priests had to engage in rituals of purification in order to producethese effigies, and it was a fearful act. To be clear, these effigies were notmerely representations of the gods, they were the gods. Once the priestfinished carving one, it would be ritually activated and placed within


Figure 4. A Maya noblewoman conjures a supernatural being througha sacrificial burnt offering of her own blood. Lintel 25 from Yaxchilan

(Photograph by William Hamblin).

the temple. In the Classic period, only Maya rulers and priests couldenter into the inner sanctuary where these effigies were housed. To enterinto the room would literally be to enter into the presence of the god.Perhaps notably, the rooms that housed these effigies within the templeswere typically covered with a curtain. Mesoamerican scholar Karl Taubenotes, "Just as a covered household doorway could Signal for privacy,the temple curtains probably were also used to indicate states of the godhoused within."28 This curtain may be conceptually similar to Latter-day Saint beliefs concerning the "veil" that separates humanity from thepresence of the Lord in the celestial realm.

Other Ritual Locations

Temples were not the only places for ritual activity. Among the Maya,rituals and prayers were frequently performed in the forest, in milpas(cornfields), and in homes. The home is considered an especially sacredplace, the center of which has a hearth comprising three stones at itscenter. As Taube explains,

WRIGHT, AXES MUNDI: RITUAL COMPLEXES' 197

As the first central place, the simple three-stone hearth may wellconstitute the original construction of creation ... Accordingto Post-Classic Central Mexican thought, the old fire godXiuhtecuhtli-Huehueteotl resides in a hearth at the world center.The Anales de Cuauhtitlan explicitly defines this place as threesacred hearthstones, each personified by a specific god (Bierhorst1992:23).29The Florentine Codex describes this locus as thecircular earth navel, or tlalxicco: "mother of the gods, father ofthe gods, who resideth in the navel of the earth, who is set inthe turquoise enclosure, [enclosed] with the waters of the lovelycotinga, enclosed with clouds - Ueueteotl, he of Ayamictlan,Xiuhtecuhtli" (Sahagun 1969, Book 6: 88-89).30 In this account,the earth navel is a place of duality, embodying both the maleand female creative principles ... This evocation of dualisticprinciples seems to describe the hearth as a place of creation.However, as the axis mundi, the hearth is also a conduit betweenthe levels of earth, sky, and underworld."

In the Book of Mormon, the Zoramite proletariat complained toAlma and Amulek that they had labored abundantly to build all of thesynagogues in Antionum but were subsequently forbidden to worshipthere due to the coarseness of their apparel (Alma 32:5-9). They believedthey could only worship in the synagogue and seemed genuinelydistraught that they were being denied entry. Alma recited the wordsof Zenos to them to assure them that they could worship anywhere andtheir petitions would be heard: wilderness or field, house or closet. Inessence, they could connect heaven and earth wherever they worshippedin faith, effectively creating their own axis mundi/?

Cultural Diversity in Mesoamerica

A common misconception is that Mesoamerica was a relativelyhomogenous area, beginning with the Olmec in the Formative period,moving on to the Maya in the Classic period, and culminating withthe Aztec during the Postclassic prior to the arrival of the Spanish.In actuality, there were scores of different cultures that inhabitedMesoamerica anciently, co-existing in space and time." Cultures thatmodern scholars sometimes lump together were in fact quite distinct


from each other. The hundreds of cities that we identify as Maya, forexample, would not have identified themselves as belonging to thesame culture. They were never unified under a single leader, such asthe Pharaohs of Egypt. Rather, each city conceptualized themselvesas a unique nation, with their own particular pantheon of gods andritual complexes. Evidence from several major polities (such as Tikal,Caracol, and Naranjo) indicates that each city had its own distinctivetriad of patron deities, along with a rich pantheon comprised of manyother gods and supernatural beings." There were even distinctions inthe rituals each polity would perform. The accession rituals of kings, forexample, varied from site to site in terms of the regalia that was wornand the specific ritual actions that were done to enthrone them." TheMesoamerican landscape was extremely heterogeneous, both betweenand within cultures. Yet each had their unique axes mundi that madetheir cities sacred to them.

Without question, the specific rituals and sacred locations of righteousNephites would have been different from those of their neighbors, butenough variation existed across the culturescape that the Nephites mayhave effectively fallen within the margin of acceptable diversity. But,as demonstrated above, the overlapping form and function of many oftheir rituals and sacred architecture may have enabled them to blend inbetter than we might suppose: temples and altars, sacrifices and burntofferings, prayers and supplications, and belief in and emulation of adying and resurrecting god. These rituals took place at their individualaxes mundi - their own sacred centers of the world - and served tobridge the gap between the human and divine realms.

Notes

1. Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane: TheNature of Religion(New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1959), 26.

2. Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane, 36.3. Julia Guernsey, Ritual & Power in Stone: The Performance of

Rulership in Mesoamerican Izapan Style Art (Austin: Universityof Texas Press, 2006), 120.

4. Pamela Gellar, "Maya Mortuary Spaces as CosmologicalMetaphors," in E. C. Robertson, J. D. Seibert, D. C. Fernandez,


and M. U. Zender, eds., Space and SpatialAnalysis in Archaeology(Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2006), 38.

5. David Stuart, "The Fire Enters His House': Architectureand Ritual in Classic Maya Texts," in Stephen D. Houston,ed., Function and Meaning in Classic Maya Architecture(Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library andCollection, 1998): 373-425.

6. John W. Welch, "The Temple in the Book of Mormon: TheTemples at the Cities of Nephi, Zarahemla, and Bountiful," inTemples of the Ancient World, ed. Donald W. Parry (Salt LakeCity and Provo, UT: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1994), 348;William J. Adams, [r., "Synagogues in the Book of Mormon," inJournal of Book of Mormon Studies 9/1 (2000): 4-13.

7. 1 Kings 5:17 notes that Solomon's temple was built with "greatstones, costly stones, and hewed stones." The "precious things"that were "not to be found upon the land" likely refer to thetypes of stones used in construction and other types of "preciousstones" used to garnish the temple in 2 Chronicles 3:6.

8. Welch, "Temple in the Book of Mormon."9. John S. [usteson, "Appendix B: Interpretations of Mayan

Hieroglyphs (1984:351)," in John S. Justeson and Lyle Campbell,eds., Phoneticism in Mayan Hieroglyphic Writing. Publication9 (Albany, NY: Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, StateUniversity of New York at Albany). While the term k'uh nah"god house" in modern Mayan language calls to mind theHebrew beit el or beit elohim, we must be cautious in drawinganalogies since the ancient Maya glyph for temple has not yetbeen deciphered phonetically (although the conceptual meaningof the logograph is clearly understood to be a temple structure).

10. Lisa Lucero, "Classic Maya Temples, Politics, and the Voice ofthe People" Latin American Antiquity 18/4 (2007): 407-427, esp.407.

11. Chronologically, the Book of Mormon falls roughly within theLate to Terminal Preclassic Maya eras (400 Be-AD 250), althoughthe precise geography is still a matter of intense debate, evenamong those who hold to a limited Mesoamerican setting.


12. Linda Schele, "The Iconography of Maya Architectural FacadesDuring the Late Classic Period," in Function and Meaning inClassic Maya Architecture, 479-517.

13. Richard Hansen, "Continuity and Disjunction: The Pre-ClassicAntecedents of Classic Maya Architecture," in Function andMeaning, 89. Hansen cautions, however, that the scarcity ofroyal tombs that have been identified from the Preclassic periodmay simply be the result of inadequate testing in structures.Nonetheless, when Preclassic temples are adorned with stuccofacades they consistently portray supernatural entities ratherthan historical rulers.

14. William A. Saturno, Karl Taube, and David E. Stuart, TheMurals of San Bartolo, El Peten, Guatemala: Part I: the NorthWall (Barnardsville, NC: Center for Ancient American Studies,2005); Karl A. Taube, William Andrew Saturno, David Stuart,and Heather Hurst, The Murals of San Bartolo, El Peten,Guatemala: The West Wall (Barnardsville, NC: Boundary EndArchaeology Research Center, 2010).

15. As it happens, the date of the San Bartolo murals falls squarelyin the time of Mosiah II, who reigned from ca. 124-91 Be,

and whose reign was pronounced upon a tower by his fatherBenjamin.

16. Takeshi Inomata, "Plazas, Performers, and Spectators," CurrentAnthropology 47/5 (2006): 805-42.

17. Although this seems obvious to modern visitors of ClassicMaya sites, to date, there have been no serious academic studiesconcerning the acoustic properties of Maya plazas. See StephenHouston and Karl Taube, "An Archaeology of the Senses:Perception and Cultural Expression in Ancient Mesoamerica,"Cambridge Archaeological Journal 10/2 (2000): 280-8l.

18. The 12th century Christian theologian Honorius of Autundeclared that "Painting ... is the literature of the laity" (GemmaAnimae, chap. 132 [PL, 172, col. 586]).

19. Stephen Houston, ''A Splendid Predicament: Young Men inClassic Maya SOciety," Cambridge Archaeological Journal 19/2(2009): 171.


20. The Nephites, for that matter, had an incomplete understandingof the plan of salvation as well (cf. D&C 128:18).

21. Linda Schele, "Human Sacrifice among the Classic Maya," inRitual Human Sacrifice in Mesoamerica (1984): 7 - 48; CarrieAnne Berryman, "Captive Sacrifice and Trophy Taking amongthe Ancient Maya," in The Taking and Displaying of HumanBody Parts as Trophies by Amerindians (2007), 377-99.

22. Mark Alan Wright and Brant Gardner, "The Cultural Context ofNephite Apostasy," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture1 (2012): 25-55. http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/the-cultural-context-of-nephite-apostasyl (accessed September 12,2014).

23. Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane, 11.24. In John 20:19-20, 26-27, Christ invites His apostles to touch His

hands first and secondarily His side.25. We might speculate that the expression broken heart may have

had a much more literal connotation in their cultural context.26. On Lintel 24 from Yaxchilan, Ix K'abal Xook is shown pulling

a thorny rope through her tongue, and the ensuing blood dripsonto the paper that she burns on Lintel 25.

27. Alfred M. Tozzer, Landa's relacion de las cosas de Yucatan, Papersof the Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology18 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1941), 159-60.

28. Karl Taube, "The Jade Hearth: Centrality, Rulership, and theClassic Maya Temple," in Function and Meaning, 429.

29. John Bierhorst, History and Mythology of the Aztecs: The CodexChimalpopoca (Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press,1992),23.

30. Bernardino de Sahagun, Florentine Codex: General History ofthe Things of New Spain. 1555-79. Translated by Arthur J. O.Anderson and Charles E. Dibble. 12 Vols. (Santa Fe: School ofAmerican Research; Salt Lake City: University of Utah, 1950-82).

31. Taube, "Jade Hearth," 432-33.32. Alma and Amulek were speaking from experience, as they

had both had powerful hierophanic experiences in the formof angelic visitations while out journeying rather than in astructure dedicated to worship (Mosiah 27:11;Alma 10:7).


33. Mark Alan Wright, "The Cultural Tapestry of Mesoamerica,"Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture23/2 (2013): 4-2l.

34. David Stuart, The Inscriptions of Temple XIX at Palenque. (SanFrancisco: Pre-Columbian Art Research Institute. 2005), 160.

35. Mark Alan Wright, A Study of Classic Maya Rulership, PhDdiss. (University of California, Riverside, Department ofAnthropology, 2011). Accessible at http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6pb5g8h2.

Mark Alan Wright earned his BA in Anthropology at UCLA and hisMA and PhD in Anthropology (with a subfield of specialization in

Mesoamerican Archaeology) from UC Riverside. He regularly conductsresearch in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras and Belize. Dr. Wright isAssistant Professor of Ancient Scripture at Brigham Young Universityand Associate Editor of the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies at theMaxwell Institute.

http://escholarship.org/uc/

temple insights - brigham young university–idahoemp.byui.edu/satterfieldb/rel390r/fur further...

Documents